Sophisticated is not a synonym for true.
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
Oh yes there are, although I can’t read a word of the Bangladesh atheist website. I can still raise a fist in solidarity, though!
For this instance of the thread prolonged, I include a video that uses a few naughty words. It’s Sunday, though, so you probably won’t play it at work. Play it in church instead.
(Current totals: 11,212 entries with 1,160,522 comments.)
And they’re bilingual, with one blog at Szekuláris Figyeló, and another in English at Hungarian Secular News. Comrades!
You can find them in Asociación Paraguaya Racionalista, and you can even listen to them at Observatorio Racionalista.
Tomorrow (Sunday), from 2-4pm Central time, I’ll be on the League of Reason show. I’m not sure exactly how this is going to work; I’m calling in via skype, the link above takes you to a chat page so you can razz me as I’m talking (I expect all the other panel members will be addressed respectfully, while you guys will be calling me “poopyhead”. Seriously, I can’t take you anywhere.)
It should be fun anyway.
They’re lurking in the Associação Ateísta Portuguesa. We’re everywhere!
Christopher Booker is whining. He went to a meeting of “scientists” and writes up the usual collection of creationist conspiracy theories: they’re oppressed, evolution is in a state of collapse, Darwin himself raised objections to his theory (never mind that he also answered them), complexity, complexity, complexity, famous scientists reject evolution, the scientific establishment is a gang of Lysenkoist bastards, oh, and by the way, global warming is a hoax and smoking isn’t that bad for you. Boring claptrap, all.
The one thing that stood out in his parade of cliches was the fact that he kept quoting these “very bright scientists”, but didn’t name a single one. They were at some secret meeting organized by “a thoughtful and youngish billionaire”…and even he isn’t named. It can’t be fear of retribution in that case — a non-scientist billionaire is simply untouchable by the Science Gestapo, and has no cause for worry at all. He could claim that he was the Emperor of Mars and that he pissed champagne, and the money would still keep rolling in. There is one thing they’re all afraid of, although they won’t come out and admit it.
Laughter.
That’s all it is. The people who come out in favor of such silliness as ID haven’t been oppressed at all, we just stop taking them seriously as scientists, and for good reason. I’d love to know who this billionaire benefactor is, not because I’ll send ninjas after him, or because I’ll somehow wipe out his investments out of spite, but simply because I’d like to point and giggle at the overpaid fool.
Fabulous fashion statement:
I’m thinking I could one-up her if I stopped trimming the beard, too.
Michael Egnor must be fishing for traffic to the graveyard of rotting ideas that the Discovery Institute calls a blog. He claims to honestly want to understand what positive values the New Atheists have, so he posted a quiz for Larry Moran and invited the authors of various blogs — all of which get more traffic and are livelier than his, and also, by the way, allow comments, making his request rather disingenuous.
His questions are so far out of it that I’m not really interested in answering them. It’s like a particularly crusty and dogmatic alchemist stirring beneath the cobwebs of his dead discipline to query a 21st century scientist about chemistry, and all he can muster is quaint questions about platonic solids, the four elements, and the philosopher’s stone.
1) Why is there anything?
2) What caused the Universe?
3) Why is there regularity (Law) in nature?
4) Of the Four Causes in nature proposed by Aristotle (material, formal, efficient, and final), which of them are real? Do final causes exist?
5) Why do we have subjective experience, and not merely objective existence?
6) Why is the human mind intentional, in the technical philosophical sense of aboutness, which is the referral to something besides itself? How can mental states be about something?
7) Does Moral Law exist in itself, or is it an artifact of nature (natural selection, etc.)
8) Why is there evil?
My fast and flippant answers:
1) Nothing is unstable.
2) Nothing caused it.
3) We wouldn’t be here if there wasn’t.
4) Material & efficient. How bizarre to think Aristotle is even relevant, except as a historical factor, or that ancient categories are apposite.
5) An epiphenomenon of the fact of instantiation.
6) Because minds aren’t isolated, but a product of brain+environment.
7) It doesn’t.
8) Evil is simply anti-human, and most of the universe is against us.
Egnor claims to want to learn what New Atheists really believe. He’s lying. He also won’t learn it by simply imposing the cracked and cloudy lens of his superstition to views that are clear and unmarred, and mostly not even concerned with the nonsense that clutters his head.
Go ahead, you can answers his comments in this thread, too. Just keep in mind every time you do that if he were honestly interested, Egnor would have allowed you to comment over there.
Although, if you want to have fun, it might be more entertaining to summarize IDiots. Egnor also writes down his “New Atheism Cliff Notes”:
1) There are no gods
2) Theists are IDiots
3) Catholic priests molest children.
The best three-line summary of Intelligent Design creationists gets its own post with credit to the author.
